6 ms·

Long paternity leaves encourage people to have less children. When you have to take months off at a time for each kid, then parents are encouraged to have fewe

Long paternity leaves encourage people to have less children. When you have to take months off at a time for each kid, then parents are encouraged to have fewer so as not to be that guy (or gal) at work who's just having babies. As someone who wants lots of kids, taking off a year for each one is just unfeasible, and would lead me to never working. It's no wonder the birth rate is declining. Mother's and father's are different. We do men a huge disservice by telling them they're going to be super needed at home for months. Barring exceptional circumstances, most men will need to be home for a few weeks at most.

ashtonkem 5y ago
That doesn’t pass the sniff test. America started having fewer kids before long parental leave was the norm. It might be true for you, but it doesn’t seem causal as a society. I think much more plausible is the reverse: having fewer kids makes long parental leave ideal. If you’re only going to have one or two kids, you’d prefer to take time off and invest in nurturing them. This isn’t possible if you’ve had four or five, since you won’t have the time.
- iammisc 5y ago
  Except, this is not just about America. By and large, countries with more parental leave have lower birth rates. America has less parental leave and has a relatively higher birth rate.
  - joshuaissac 5y ago
    Or perhaps the introduction of paternity leave is a reaction to lower birth rates?
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
      And changing values around what children are for. The idea that children are things to be cherished and invested in (emotionally and economically) is a relatively new idea. Historically children were economic producers for the household, rather than an economic sink.
    - iammisc 5y ago
      It's possible, but I think it's the opposite, because as they introduce paternity leaves, fewer children are born. It contributes to the perception of parents as lazy.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    I think Europe’s lower fertility rate is better explained through infant and maternal mortality, two factors that are well studied in how they affect fertility rates. America has a higher infant mortality rate (5.7 vs. 3.3) and maternal death rate (17.6 vs. 6.0) as compared to Europe. These seem like much more plausible reasons for a lower birth rate than average parental leave. And that’s before we even begin analyzing the squishy factors of norms and expectations. All of our preferences are subtly changed by the society in which we live. If you live in a country with low fertility rates, having only one child seems more normal than it might in a region with medium to high fertility. These trends have a tendency to become self reinforcing, as well as drive social programs too. If the norm is that most women will have a single child, society can afford to invest more in that child than they could if she was going to have six on average. Frankly, longer paternal leave strikes me as more of a result rather than a cause of lower fertility rates.
zepto 5y ago
> When you have to take months off at a time for each kid Paternity leave is optional.
- iammisc 5y ago
  Some countries require parents to take time off.
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    So take time off? I fail to see how this is a problem for you.
    - iammisc 5y ago
      It's not a problem for me since I'm an american, but people keep pushing for this model here. I don't want that. I don't want to be forced to have fewer children.
      - ashtonkem 5y ago
        I frankly think the idea that paternity leave “forces” you to have fewer kids is utter nonsense.
        iammisc 5y ago
        Yes, if there is mandatory leave, it of course does. For example, according to https://anewlifeinnorway.wordpress.com/2013/12/04/norwegian-parental-benefits-vs-british-parental-benefits/ https://anewlifeinnorway.wordpress.com/2013/12/04/norwegian-..., in Norway, fathers must take 14 weeks off. That means if a man wants 8 kids, then that's almost 112 weeks off... or two years! That's ridiculous, and only serves to decrease wages of familial breadwinners than to actually help families. This will just result in a society where only those without kids are the richest, and normal families suffer.
        5y ago
c-cube 5y ago
So you want a lot of children, but not to take care of them. Ok.
- iammisc 5y ago
  Not true at all. I just recognize that as a man, my utility at home is limited in the early days. Newborns want to nurse and sleep mostly, which -- get this -- their mothers also want to do. Of course, immediately after birth, you definitely need an extra caretaker at home to help mom heal. Now before I proceed, please note I am completely in favor of paid family leave, especially for parental leave. I think it's a shame we don't have a paid family leave system throughout the country. My only disagreement is on the length of time. With a new baby, it's nice for dad to be around to get used to the new dynamic, to get the newborn baby cuddles out of the way, and to spend time with older children who may be stressed by the arrival of a new sibling, but that's a few weeks (I'd say 4 weeks on average, maybe 6 for the first) plus some early days, not a few months (unless there are extenuating circumstances). Moreover, dad honestly shouldn't be taking care of kids all day. Dad (and mom too, but this article is about paternity leave) is in the prime of his career. Money is necessary to raise children, and dad's utility making money is almost always greater than the utility he provides at home. I think a more reasonable solution to paternity leave is some weeks off followed by the ability to take early days to spend a little extra time with family. The months-long policies some countries mandate seem excessive to me. Or alternatively, instead of paying dad to stay home and do nothing, pay grandparents and family caretakers instead. Paternity leave should be 'transferrable', so if dad decides to go back early, the money that would have been paid to him is paid to grandma and grandpa (or aunt and uncle or cousin or whatever) instead. American families are incredibly atomized (same is true of most western societies). This necessitates parental leave, when in reality, most men probably don't need very much paternity leave if they knew mom was supported at home. For me and my wife, I will take a relatively short paternity leave (4 weeks) with our next baby. My mom and dad and my mother and father-in-law will take care of our other children and help my wife with the baby while she's home. It's nice to see both my father and father-in-law who both worked very hard to provide for my wife and I get to spend time just taking care of their grandchildren, instead of having to focus on work. For me, being in a different stage of life, I recognize my work and income is the biggest utility I have to my family. When I am an old man and my children have grandchildren (God willing), I will take care of them as well. My father spends almost every day with my children, playing with them, talking to them, and taking them around town. That's great. Kids love their granddads, and granddad -- who is retired -- best serves his family by helping his children with their families. I am happy to see my dad take this leading role with my kids because he is making up for time he didn't get to spend with us. Honestly, I find the idea that mom and dad have to look after baby all day and night absolutely baffling. For my brother and I, we were raised mostly by our grandparents and aunts day-to-day. Both my mother and father took very short paternity/maternity leaves. Both worked. Grandparents and family took care of us as much as possible. We were shuffled around a lot. This was fine. I don't feel like I missed out at all. In contrast, I feel like my peers missed out. Some of my friends only really have a relationship with parents. They have little contact with extended family, whereas I am always talking to my grandparents (when they were alive at least) and my aunts. I'm pretty market-oriented when it comes to public policy, but frankly, family ought to work like a communist dictatorship. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. My ability is in work, and I don't need the same amount of rest my wife does after birth. She'll be well supported by our family. My children will grow up surrounded by their entire family, not just mom and dad, as it ought to be.

ashtonkem 5y ago

That doesn’t pass the sniff test. America started having fewer kids before long parental leave was the norm. It might be true for you, but it doesn’t seem causal as a society. I think much more plausible is the reverse: having fewer kids makes long parental leave ideal. If you’re only going to have one or two kids, you’d prefer to take time off and invest in nurturing them. This isn’t possible if you’ve had four or five, since you won’t have the time.

iammisc 5y ago
Except, this is not just about America. By and large, countries with more parental leave have lower birth rates. America has less parental leave and has a relatively higher birth rate.
- joshuaissac 5y ago
  Or perhaps the introduction of paternity leave is a reaction to lower birth rates?
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    And changing values around what children are for. The idea that children are things to be cherished and invested in (emotionally and economically) is a relatively new idea. Historically children were economic producers for the household, rather than an economic sink.
  - iammisc 5y ago
    It's possible, but I think it's the opposite, because as they introduce paternity leaves, fewer children are born. It contributes to the perception of parents as lazy.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  I think Europe’s lower fertility rate is better explained through infant and maternal mortality, two factors that are well studied in how they affect fertility rates. America has a higher infant mortality rate (5.7 vs. 3.3) and maternal death rate (17.6 vs. 6.0) as compared to Europe. These seem like much more plausible reasons for a lower birth rate than average parental leave. And that’s before we even begin analyzing the squishy factors of norms and expectations. All of our preferences are subtly changed by the society in which we live. If you live in a country with low fertility rates, having only one child seems more normal than it might in a region with medium to high fertility. These trends have a tendency to become self reinforcing, as well as drive social programs too. If the norm is that most women will have a single child, society can afford to invest more in that child than they could if she was going to have six on average. Frankly, longer paternal leave strikes me as more of a result rather than a cause of lower fertility rates.

zepto 5y ago

> When you have to take months off at a time for each kid Paternity leave is optional.

iammisc 5y ago
Some countries require parents to take time off.
- ashtonkem 5y ago
  So take time off? I fail to see how this is a problem for you.
  - iammisc 5y ago
    It's not a problem for me since I'm an american, but people keep pushing for this model here. I don't want that. I don't want to be forced to have fewer children.
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
      I frankly think the idea that paternity leave “forces” you to have fewer kids is utter nonsense.
      - iammisc 5y ago
        Yes, if there is mandatory leave, it of course does. For example, according to https://anewlifeinnorway.wordpress.com/2013/12/04/norwegian-parental-benefits-vs-british-parental-benefits/ https://anewlifeinnorway.wordpress.com/2013/12/04/norwegian-..., in Norway, fathers must take 14 weeks off. That means if a man wants 8 kids, then that's almost 112 weeks off... or two years! That's ridiculous, and only serves to decrease wages of familial breadwinners than to actually help families. This will just result in a society where only those without kids are the richest, and normal families suffer.
        5y ago

c-cube 5y ago

So you want a lot of children, but not to take care of them. Ok.

iammisc 5y ago
Not true at all. I just recognize that as a man, my utility at home is limited in the early days. Newborns want to nurse and sleep mostly, which -- get this -- their mothers also want to do. Of course, immediately after birth, you definitely need an extra caretaker at home to help mom heal. Now before I proceed, please note I am completely in favor of paid family leave, especially for parental leave. I think it's a shame we don't have a paid family leave system throughout the country. My only disagreement is on the length of time. With a new baby, it's nice for dad to be around to get used to the new dynamic, to get the newborn baby cuddles out of the way, and to spend time with older children who may be stressed by the arrival of a new sibling, but that's a few weeks (I'd say 4 weeks on average, maybe 6 for the first) plus some early days, not a few months (unless there are extenuating circumstances). Moreover, dad honestly shouldn't be taking care of kids all day. Dad (and mom too, but this article is about paternity leave) is in the prime of his career. Money is necessary to raise children, and dad's utility making money is almost always greater than the utility he provides at home. I think a more reasonable solution to paternity leave is some weeks off followed by the ability to take early days to spend a little extra time with family. The months-long policies some countries mandate seem excessive to me. Or alternatively, instead of paying dad to stay home and do nothing, pay grandparents and family caretakers instead. Paternity leave should be 'transferrable', so if dad decides to go back early, the money that would have been paid to him is paid to grandma and grandpa (or aunt and uncle or cousin or whatever) instead. American families are incredibly atomized (same is true of most western societies). This necessitates parental leave, when in reality, most men probably don't need very much paternity leave if they knew mom was supported at home. For me and my wife, I will take a relatively short paternity leave (4 weeks) with our next baby. My mom and dad and my mother and father-in-law will take care of our other children and help my wife with the baby while she's home. It's nice to see both my father and father-in-law who both worked very hard to provide for my wife and I get to spend time just taking care of their grandchildren, instead of having to focus on work. For me, being in a different stage of life, I recognize my work and income is the biggest utility I have to my family. When I am an old man and my children have grandchildren (God willing), I will take care of them as well. My father spends almost every day with my children, playing with them, talking to them, and taking them around town. That's great. Kids love their granddads, and granddad -- who is retired -- best serves his family by helping his children with their families. I am happy to see my dad take this leading role with my kids because he is making up for time he didn't get to spend with us. Honestly, I find the idea that mom and dad have to look after baby all day and night absolutely baffling. For my brother and I, we were raised mostly by our grandparents and aunts day-to-day. Both my mother and father took very short paternity/maternity leaves. Both worked. Grandparents and family took care of us as much as possible. We were shuffled around a lot. This was fine. I don't feel like I missed out at all. In contrast, I feel like my peers missed out. Some of my friends only really have a relationship with parents. They have little contact with extended family, whereas I am always talking to my grandparents (when they were alive at least) and my aunts. I'm pretty market-oriented when it comes to public policy, but frankly, family ought to work like a communist dictatorship. From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. My ability is in work, and I don't need the same amount of rest my wife does after birth. She'll be well supported by our family. My children will grow up surrounded by their entire family, not just mom and dad, as it ought to be.